Bibi Rejects the New York Times

Why Netanyahu refuses to publish an op-ed in the so-called “newspaper of record.”

Ron Dermer is a senior advisor to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The following letter was written to the editorial board of the New York Times.

I received your email requesting that Prime Minister Netanyahu submit an op-ed to the New York Times. Unfortunately, we must respectfully decline.

On matters relating to Israel, the op-ed page of the "paper of record" has failed to heed the late Senator Moynihan's admonition that everyone is entitled to their own opinion but that no one is entitled to their own facts.

A case in point was your decision last May to publish the following bit of historical revision by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas:

It is important to note that the last time the question of Palestinian statehood took center stage at the General Assembly, the question posed to the international community was whether our homeland should be partitioned into two states. In November 1947, the General Assembly made its recommendation and answered in the affirmative. Shortly thereafter, Zionist forces expelled Palestinian Arabs to ensure a decisive Jewish majority in the future state of Israel, and Arab armies intervened. War and further expulsions ensued.

This paragraph effectively turns on its head an event within living memory in which the Palestinians rejected the UN partition plan accepted by the Jews and then joined five Arab states in launching a war to annihilate the embryonic Jewish state. It should not have made it past the most rudimentary fact-checking.

The Times consistently ignores the steps Israel has taken to advance peace.

The opinions of some of your regular columnists regarding Israel are well known. They consistently distort the positions of our government and ignore the steps it has taken to advance peace. They cavalierly defame our country by suggesting that marginal phenomena condemned by Prime Minister Netanyahu and virtually every Israeli official somehow reflects government policy or Israeli society as a whole. Worse, one columnist even stooped to suggesting that the strong expressions of support for Prime Minister Netanyahu during his speech this year to Congress was "bought and paid for by the Israel lobby" rather than a reflection of the broad support for Israel among the American people.

Yet instead of trying to balance these views with a different opinion, it would seem as if the surest way to get an op-ed published in the New York Times these days, no matter how obscure the writer or the viewpoint, is to attack Israel.

Even so, the recent piece on "Pinkwashing," in which Israel is vilified for having the temerity to champion its record on gay-rights, set a new bar that will be hard for you to lower in the future.

Not to be accused of cherry-picking to prove a point, I discovered that during the last three months (September through November) you published 20 op-eds about Israel in the New York Times and International Herald Tribune. After dividing the op-eds into two categories, "positive" and "negative," with "negative" meaning an attack against the State of Israel or the policies of its democratically elected government, I found that 19 out of 20 columns were "negative."

The only "positive" piece was penned by Richard Goldstone (of the infamous Goldstone Report), in which he defended Israel against the slanderous charge of Apartheid.

Yet your decision to publish that op-ed came a few months after your paper reportedly rejected Goldstone's previous submission. In that earlier piece, which was ultimately published in the Washington Post, the man who was quoted the world over for alleging that Israel had committed war crimes in Gaza, fundamentally changed his position. According to the New York Times op-ed page, that was apparently news unfit to print.

Your refusal to publish "positive" pieces about Israel apparently does not stem from a shortage of supply. It was brought to my attention that the Majority Leader and Minority Whip of the U.S. House of Representatives jointly submitted an op-ed to your paper in September opposing the Palestinian action at the United Nations and supporting the call of both Israel and the Obama administration for direct negotiations without preconditions. In an age of intense partisanship, one would have thought that strong bipartisan support for Israel on such a timely issue would have made your cut.

So with all due respect to your prestigious paper, you will forgive us for declining your offer. We wouldn't want to be seen as "Bibiwashing" the op-ed page of the New York Times.

Do you agree with Bibi's decision? Let us know in the comment section below.

The opinions expressed in the comment section are the personal views of the commenters. Comments are moderated, so please keep it civil.

Visitor Comments: 143

(136)
Anonymous,
July 16, 2015 4:26 PM

The New York Times wanted to honor Netanyahu and

give him a chance to explain his views. Who was honoring whom? Who was dishonoring whom? Netanyahu and Israel's loss...

(135)
ARTH,
July 16, 2015 4:15 PM

What does not presenting one's position in the most

prestigious editorial page of the world accomplish and how does that advance the interests of Israel and/or Netanyahu's agenda? Would someone care to explain? He had a change to explain his views and he threw it away.....

(134)
Anonymous,
August 4, 2014 7:35 PM

read the NYTimes.com free every day in whole or part on the net

The times supposedly limits the number of articles you can read on its website and, supposedly, requires you to subscribe if unlimited viewing is desired. I regularly delete all cookies from my browser. Once the times’ cookies are deleted, you can once again read the maximum number of article. if you delete cookies often enough, you can read the entire paper every day of the year. Why pay for garbage, when you can wrap your fish in as much garbage as you wish for free. Of course, you do have to pay for blank paper.

(133)
Anonymous,
August 9, 2013 11:32 AM

This makes me proud

Thank you so much for sharing this awsome letter to NY Times. It makes me proud of the leader of Israel

(132)
Ellis Bradin,
August 7, 2013 7:09 PM

I completely agree with Bibi. Israeli blood is cheap and there are always those who will continue to attack us.

(131)
hy grossman,
August 7, 2013 6:35 PM

Absolutely agree with the prime minister's office

I gave up reading the NY times some 20 years ago due to their bias which continues to this day

(130)
Danny Levy,
December 16, 2012 5:12 PM

Bibi's refusal to write an OP-Ed page in the NY Times

I heartily commend Prime Minister Netanyahu's decision to not honour the NY Times by submitting an OP-Ed piece. Many prominent supporters of Israel have cancelled their subscriptions and numerous advertisers have cancelled their ad schedules. The Times' consistent boycott of the truth when writing and reporting about Jewish and Israeli related subjects has been so conclusively documented we as a community should boycott any contact we have with the paper. With its program of "All the anti-Israeli News Fit To print " should help wean us from the need to read it.

(129)
Ofra Ben David,
September 3, 2012 4:50 AM

I love you Bibi for taking a stand against this anti Israel and leftist paper it's a waste of your valuable time indeed!

(128)
Anonymous,
August 22, 2012 1:28 AM

I agree with you completely!!!!!

THAT LAND BELONGS TO ISRAEL AND JERUSALEM IS THE CAPITAL!!!!

(127)
Robert Twic,
February 17, 2012 2:15 AM

THE JURY'S IN AND THE OP-ED WUD' B IGNORED

Bibi's penning an op-ed wud' b a waste of his valuable time to people who have already decided that Israel doesn't have the right to defend its right-to-exist and which country has face annihilation threat from day 1 of its existence.

(126)
Anonymous,
January 27, 2012 5:43 PM

Bravo Bibi!!! Kudos for not caving to a publication that is well know for it's anti-Israel bias.

(125)
Vera Varadi,
January 24, 2012 12:38 AM

I agree with your decision.

I agree with your decision and with the reasons supporting it.

(124)
Anonymous,
January 24, 2012 12:36 AM

Good for Him! The "prestigious" NY Times,leftist-lioberal,anti isralel RAG! Same on them

(123)
Emanuel,
January 22, 2012 4:59 PM

I would like to stop receiving the n.y.times,which is an anti semitic and stupid anti Israel paper,but my wife won't allow it.

These idiotic Jewish anti semitic and anti Israel should have their zevel brains examined.

(122)
Anonymous,
January 8, 2012 8:30 PM

Hooray

Imagine the Prime Minister of Israel rejecting the offer of the NY Pravda. What will he do next? Perhaps take on the unelected dictators of Israel. Namely the Israeli Supreme Court.

(121)
Anonymous,
January 1, 2012 9:26 PM

I once regarded this as a great newspaper.
Their comments and inferences about several subjects
make me wonder about them. How biased they appear to be. What do they consider "news that's fit to print"? Only if it has their biased opinions?

(120)
Mark,
December 30, 2011 10:53 PM

counter NY slanders with facts

I support everything that Ron Dremer wrote except his ultimate decision not to write the op-ed. I wish he followed Alan Dershiwitz's position which is to fight for Israel by tirelessly exposing bigoted lies about her, including those published by NYTimes. If Netanyahu was invited to write an op-ed, and if it was guaranteed that it would not be altered by the NYTimes (I assume that wold be the case), it would provide an excellent opportunity to expose the malicious nature of NY Times whose editorial staff, journalists, and readers appear to hold bigoted anti-Israel and anti-Jewish views.

(119)
Barbara Dagen,
December 30, 2011 3:14 PM

Agree and admire Bibi.

The letter written in response to the NY Times for Bibi to write a letter in the op-ed page is brilliant. The NY Times no matter how esteemed it is supposed to be has historically been anti-Israel. Yes to Prime Minister
Netanyahu and No to the New York Times! Kol Hakavod to Bibi!

(118)
Sarah J. Rosenbloom,
December 28, 2011 12:49 AM

Netanyahu made his case beautifully for honesty when it comes to writing about Israel.

The New York Times has shamed itself in publishing distortions about Israel. Nineteen out of 20 op-eds about Israel are negative! Wow! You don't go for subtlety, do you? Or fairness. What a rotten track record!

(117)
Anonymous,
December 28, 2011 12:18 AM

Somethin's fishy...

On our refrigerator is an promo ad for the New York Times -- a fish wrapped in what is clearly the NYT newspaper. My husband drew over the fish a think-balloon with the words, "What smells?"
He got that right.

The clear tilt of the Times is lamentable. While I would personally publish-if I could be assured my remarks would not be "edited" by the Times, the rufusal to engage the time is understandable. The Times needs to show some good faith-the very least of which could be in checking facts. A more balanced dialog benefits all.

(114)
Mr. Cohen,
December 23, 2011 7:01 PM

Stopped Buying New York Times in 1982

I stopped buying the New York Times in 1982 because its relentless anti-Israel bias was obvious.
Since then, the New York Times has not done anything significant to correct its relentless anti-Israel bias; on the contrary, it seems to have become worse.
I do not read the New York Times even when it is available for free. When I see an abandoned copy of the New York Times in a subway car, I throw it in the garbage without reading it.

Rina,
December 27, 2011 12:24 PM

boycott

Mr. Cohen did a very smart thiing. Why don't all American Jews just stop buying the New York Times?

(113)
Stephen Paul,
December 23, 2011 12:15 PM

For a PHD Michael S Kogan's thinking is muddled. The settlement policy is the consequence of historical rejection-ism and violence by the Palestinians and their Arab sponsors in clear violation of international law. Whether he or the NYT agrees with it or not is irrelevant to the question in which the NYT considers itself at liberty to publish revisionist canards and be selectively biased against Israel and still expect the Israeli government to run after it. I believe not and it would be instructive to know if Ron Dermer received the courtesy of a reply.

(112)
Baruch Cohon,
December 23, 2011 12:51 AM

Yasher Koach Bibi for giving the Times the answer it deserved. The only problem is that more people read that slanted paper than will read your answer. That is our problem, not yours. I hope aish.com and other pro-Israel outlets will circulate your answer to the world.

(111)
Aaron,
December 22, 2011 8:38 PM

NY Times Lies

I give credit to Prime Minister Netanyahu and especially Ron Dermer, Senior Advisor to the Israeli Prime Minister. I wonder how much support does the NY Times gets from the Arab bloc and people like J Street and George Soros. I thought they had a line at the top of their newspaper :All the News that is Fit to Print" but that has changed to "All the News That is Fit to Print In Support of Arabs and Attacks On Israel". I keep telling people not to read or buy your one sided paper if it can be even called that. 19 out of 20 articles anti Israel you are doing as well as Joseph Goebells. As he said if you keep telling a lie often enough people will begin to believe it. Your simple minds are nothing compared to the Wall Street Journal. Keep kissing the behind of falsehood.

(110)
Robert Cohen,
December 22, 2011 6:21 PM

Thumbs up to Bibi. The New York Times is trash like most of the newspaper of today!!!!!!

(109)
Michael S. Kogan,PhD,
December 22, 2011 4:20 PM

Bibi is wrong

The New York Times represents enlightened world opinion which condemns the settlement policy on the West Bank which is in clear violation of international law.As a believing, practicing Jew I am appalled by an Israeli policy which compromises our faith's moral witness in the world and violates the command to "be mindful of the stranger in thy midst." As long as Bibi's policies continue on this path, Israel will find little sympathy among people of conscience.As Israel becomes ever more isolated, Jews who demand knee-jerk support of whatever policy Bibi decides to pursue should consider that the fault is not in "The Times" but in themselves.

(108)
stanley gordon,
December 22, 2011 3:36 PM

I agree with Bibi

The times motto,"ALL THE NEWS THAT IS FIT TO PRINT",only applies if they deem it to be fit!!!!!!!!

(107)
abe silverman,
December 22, 2011 3:11 PM

I would like to see Bibi's response published in the New York Times and every major publication in the US.

(106)
joanna,
December 22, 2011 2:30 PM

The New York Times is a propaganda rag which has set its face against TRUTH. Like an arachnid spins its web, so does The New York Times, spread its net of lies, out to devour and twist the truth. Why have they. also, become so worthless ? Why does anyone still read the lies they merchandise in?

(105)
Moshe Yudkowsky,
December 22, 2011 1:18 AM

Natanyahu was absolutely right to reject the New York Times. If he hadn't, they would have found a way to make every single word he wrote look bad.

(104)
Ramon Riveravega,
December 22, 2011 12:36 AM

I agree with the Bibi's decision. The New York Times has an agenda against Israel. Therefore, Israel should not sponsor such a newspaper; I don't read it.

(103)
Marianne,
December 21, 2011 11:21 PM

A leader who stands for truth.

Israel needs more leaders like Bibi who will stand for the truth and speak out against lies and corruption. Go for it Bibi and weed it out of Israeli government as well.

(102)
Yehudit Spero,
December 21, 2011 10:22 PM

Bibi's comment to the NYT is correct

I applaud the decision of PM Benjamin Netanyahu to not contribute to the op-ed of the NYT newspaper. At a time where we are feeling so isolated and unfairly projected to the world why would we want to subject ourselves to that?
I will be curious to know what sanctions the UN will take against Syria at this time ( atrocities that have been discovered today) and what the NYT will have to say about those events if anything at all!

(101)
Jane Allison,
December 21, 2011 10:00 PM

Stop the Rewriting of History

Bravo Bibi! Kudos for standing firm in the face of the hypocrisy of the NYT/

(100)
Marilyn Caplin,
December 21, 2011 9:51 PM

comment o the NYT and Bibi

I am impressed with the clarity of your article and want to cheer you on. Well written, well put and we need more of this kind of response!

(99)
Joey,
December 21, 2011 8:49 PM

Not So Sure

I can understand this position, but if pro-Israeli writers start REFUSING to publish in the NYT, how will the issue be resolved?
God bless.

(98)
kate coley,
December 21, 2011 7:33 PM

Pray the PM can stay strong

I only wish our own Government would stay true to our original beliefs and support of Israel. I pray we wll have a new leader with the character as strong as Netanyahu.

(97)
Dr. Jeffrey Fine,
December 21, 2011 7:18 PM

Thank HaShem that there is astute PR conscious near Bibi

It has always been a maxim that it is more important who people THINK you are, than who you really are. This is moreso for the State of Israel. In an age where the wars are fought in media what is neede is a mind like Ron Dermer! Cheers and Amen.

(96)
Gregory Ganser,
December 21, 2011 6:22 PM

Follow Bibi in a total boycott

Excellent decision to boycott future op-eds in the NYT. It is very clear that subscription sales is directly proportional to authentic journalism. Good luck and good riddance as your paper drifts further into the red.

(95)
Anonymous,
December 21, 2011 5:28 PM

I agree with BIBI

Truth is very important. The New York Times is biased against Israel constantly and we need to stand up and affirm our position. I support Bibi.

(94)
Cherry,
December 21, 2011 5:07 PM

The NYT is a joke as are many other publications which will probably be out of business within the next year or so. What a waste of good wood pulp.

(93)
Krista Jacobs Greenwalt,
December 21, 2011 4:14 PM

Addressing the obvious, Bibi says, "No thanks."

This has been a long time coming. Apparently the NY Times has given in to status quo, ie, bash those darn Israelis and all things Israel. Never mind she is often the first to come to the aid of countries in need. Never mind her scientific breakthroughs. Never mind her unparalleled care and assistance to her enemies. Above all, never mind she is the only slither of democracy in a hot mess known as the Middle East.

(92)
M.P.Dariel,
December 21, 2011 4:06 PM

Agree, but admit i have reservations regarding the strategy

Be right and smart!

(91)
joanna,
December 21, 2011 3:31 PM

Yes, Yes, Yes! Don't lower yourself to their theatrics and misinformation. They will only use what you say to form and mold it into a weapon to use against you and Israel and to cause trouble. Very wise decision to stay away from our

(90)
EMILIO GOLDCHAIN,
December 21, 2011 2:46 PM

i fully agree with bibi' s decision.

bibi's reply should be sent to friendly papers so that people other than NYT readers know about it.

(89)
Beverly Kurtin,
December 21, 2011 5:27 AM

Lauro Neto is right

The NYT used to be a decent, honest newspapers. But like so many cowardly, viciously antiSemetic papers with reporters in the Arab sections of the land near Israel, they are afraid of telling the truth because one of their "reporters"may have a fatwa issued on them.
The real shame of both the NYT and Reuters is that Jewish families started both. I do not purchase material from either; I get it via the net.
I exploded when it was said that Jews apparently think that a Jewish life is worth more than an Arab's because they let several Arabs go free for the release of only one Jewish soldier.
Never mind that Hamas demanded that for the trade, but you know something, folks, ONE JEWISH LIFE IS WORTH A MILLION ARAB in my book.
Jew and Israelis have done so much for the world that they should be kissing our feet and some day they will. As a young girl I couldn't go to the beach because of the fear of getting Polio. A Jewish doctor, Jonas Salk of blessed memory, found the cure and didn't even bother to patent it. He asked, "Would you patent the sun?"
Israel invented the Firewall that is so essential for anyone operating on the web. Instant chatting, Pentium Chips, XP, Vista, Win7, all products of Israel.
What have the Arabs given us except nearly 3,000 innocent lives snuffed out on 9/11/01? Airplane hijackings and bombings. Massive inconvenience for anyone trying to fly anywhere. They gave us Algebra (thanks a lot) and a numbering system. What else? NOTHING BUT TSURUS by the boatload.
I had an application on my Tablets for the NYT: they've been long gone, I trust it as much as I trust Faux Snooze.

(88)
Basheva Shearer,
December 21, 2011 5:21 AM

Bravo Bibi

I am so in support of Bibi's declination I have cancelled my NYT subscription and told them why I am boycotting their antisemitic paper. I'm sick of them.

(87)
Anonymous,
December 20, 2011 10:48 PM

This letter of declination should make the rounds of the world. Let facts be known and lies called lies.

(86)
JOSEPH COHEN,
December 20, 2011 9:39 PM

A BREATH OF FRESH AIR

What a refreshing article and for a change one with facts not bias hatred. It would do a publication , like the NY Times justice to finally come out of its anti-Israel stance and publish the facts so the world can make better decisions about this issue.

(85)
Jerry,
December 20, 2011 6:56 PM

Netanyahu's letter to the New York Times

This letter should be sent to the New York Times and dare them to publish it in their Op-Ed Section!!!!

(84)
Sharon,
December 20, 2011 6:55 PM

Not sure

I'm not sure it was the right reaction. Of course the paper is a rag and very biased against Israel, but still if you have the chance to contribute even 5 per cent, giving access to the truth to even a small number, why not do it. Bibi wouldn't have to spend much time writing someone else on his staff could draft it. It's not a question of his time, but a refusal to play the game. I wonder what pro-Israel, British journalist, Melanie Phillips, who is always complaining about our terrible PR, would say about this action. Of course, if the NYT had published Dermer's response that would be having your cake and eating it too, but I don't suppose they did.

(83)
saul,
December 20, 2011 6:33 PM

Diplomatic action needed

The refusal to write in the op-ed for NYT is un-diplomatic since we are living in this world and we have observed that false incorrect facts are presented as the wholsesome truth which should be tackled in their own langugage using the same media. So facts have to brought out and distorted lies should be communicated to all so that the masses will decide who is at fault and whom one should support. No doubt NYT is biased but that can also be pointed out in the op-ed conveying the real truth.

(82)
Laurie,
December 20, 2011 9:06 AM

Bibi nails it once again

I've lived in Israel for 28 years and have never lived under a Prime Minister who, so consistently, presents Israel as the way that it should be presented to the world. PR -- yes. Explanation - yes. Bowing down to the anti-Israel and anti-semites -- no. Kol HaKavod

(81)
Rick,
December 20, 2011 5:01 AM

Way to go Bibi !

Thank G-d Bibi was so steadfast in standing up to the blatanly anti-semitic nyt..... I salute you, Bibi !!!

(80)
Jeffrey Gorelick,
December 20, 2011 3:31 AM

TOTALLY AGREE.

Thanks for expressing a refreshing view about the New York Times.

(79)
Fred Stoll,
December 20, 2011 3:12 AM

I disagree with Bibi's refusal

Bibi should have agreed to submit op-ed article on condition it be published in total and then submit blistering attack on the NY Times pointing out their anti-Israel bias.

(78)
Lauro Neto,
December 20, 2011 2:47 AM

al jazeera

NYT,IS THE AMERICAN AL JAZEERA.THE CATER TO ISLAM,THEY SUPPORT HAMAS AND HEZBOLLAH! ISRAEL IS THE GREAT EVIL.

(77)
SANDOR SCHWEIGER, Esq.,
December 20, 2011 2:34 AM

If one believes that truth is a potent weapon, Bibi should have accepted the offer.

If the Prime Minister feels strongly that the NYTimes' reporting or editorial pieces are biased against the State of Israel, and sometimes laced with untruths, then he should have taken the opportunity to set the record straight. The Times is indeed the "paper of record" for millions and what appears in its editions carries considerable weight. An Op-Ed piece by Bibi along the lines of Mr. Dermer's excellent letter would have had considerable influence on the NYTimes readership. Do not forget that it is the reading audience that the Prime Minister is seeking to reach, not the editorial staff or the Op. Ed contributors. Bibi should know how to take the fight to the enemy.

Abigail,
December 20, 2011 9:43 AM

"An Op-Ed piece by Bibi along the lines of Mr. Dermer's excellent letter would have had considerable influence on the NYTimes readership."
After reading the comments to Thomas Friedman's article where he makes the remark about Congress being "bought and paid for" by the Israel lobby, I respectfully disagree. At most the facts would confuse them, not change their minds.

(76)
joe fasano,
December 20, 2011 1:24 AM

Go Ron

I wholeheartedly agree. The NY Times is an extremely bias, left leaning paper.
I would not buy or read this newspaper if they gave it to me free.
They, along with the present administration, are really not doing any justice for the Israeli cause,
What surprises me is that a great portion of the Israeli population in this country always read this paper and they consistently support the left. WHY?

(75)
Robby Cicco,
December 19, 2011 11:51 PM

No one reads the Times anymore anyway

Who cares, no one reads the Times anymore. They ceased being relevant years ago, and their record of anti-Israel bias is almost legendary.
We should all boycott the NYT.

(74)
Frederica Steller,
December 19, 2011 7:21 PM

If the famed New York Times is so anti-semitic as to favor Israel's enemies; then, I totally agree with Bibi's decision to reject the New York Times, and anybody else who holds to Nazi type attitudes and mindsets.

(73)
Marlene Josephs,
December 19, 2011 4:44 PM

We can only hope...

that Tsipi Livni and Shimon Peres won't jump at the chance to write an op-ed piece in the Trash York Times. It seems that these liberal morons love to see their words and names in print any time that they can manage it...even at the expense of the Israeli people's safety.

(72)
M. GEWIRTZ,
December 19, 2011 3:59 PM

STANDING OVATION

BIBI SHOULD GET ANOTHER STANDING OVATION.
HOORAY!!

(71)
howard yagerman,
December 19, 2011 2:51 PM

The right thing

In a world where our currency,beliefs and the truth are devalued daily,finally someone of note stood up and said no more.The New York Times is a prestigious institiution but in a world where the nobel prize is given out like candy at Halloween to people who would trick rather than treat, I would rather see a man of integrity say no and walk away.
Groucho Marx said that he didn't want to be a member of a club who would have him as a member.

(70)
Independent,
December 19, 2011 1:44 PM

The NYT is mild look at the Guardian

I normally refer to the Guardian as Der Sturmer. At a recent carol service I was glad to hear that Bethlehem was in Judea - not some recently named "West Bank".

(69)
dale hurley,
December 19, 2011 1:20 PM

missed opportunity

The Prime Minister should have taken the opportunity to submit an op-ed in the tone of this article. Facts need to be reinforced time and time again.

Alan S.,
December 20, 2011 12:08 AM

While this comment in its heart means well, the 'fact' is that the NYTimes simply does not print the 'facts' that history records or that actually occur. The NYTimes prints the 'facts' as it wants them to be, not as they are. Why waste Bibi's time?

(68)
Moshe in Yerushalayim,
December 19, 2011 12:27 PM

Witht the current Israeli government and Knesset, 19 out of 20 is perfectly appropriate

Frankly, it should have been 20 out of 20. This government and this Knesset have turned friends of Israel into enemies, have isolated Israel internationally, and havd done damage to our beloved Israel that will require many years to remedy. And yes, Congress has been bought and paid for. Why complain? AIPAC and the rest of the right are getting what they paid for.

Anonymous,
December 20, 2011 12:17 AM

The number that really impresses...

As I write this reply, I note that there are 73 main comments, and several additional sub-comments/replies. 74 out of 76 total comments agree with Bibi's position. Only one other aligns with you. So...its not 20 out of 20 that is the important number here, but 74 our 76 that impresses.

(67)
Ginger Pinchot,
December 19, 2011 12:23 PM

Bibi's decision is wise.

More of us need to expose the shabby journalism that the Times and often the Washington Post exhibit. If we do not, the TRUTH is distorted and becomes irrelevant.
We have to help "right" an upside down view of who wants peace - it's Israel and not the Palestinians.

(66)
miri s,
December 19, 2011 12:09 PM

agree with bibi

good for you Bibi. u r right. they lie about Israel all the time.

(65)
Anonymous,
December 19, 2011 10:03 AM

So glad to see Jews standing up for ourselves having been overlong abused by the NYTimes consistent bias, slander and libeling of the Jews serving as conduits for Islamic States propaganda and lies

Standing up for ourselves and the land of our people Israel should be the 11th Commandment!

(64)
Fred,
December 19, 2011 6:14 AM

How to be a "neutral"paper but not to be neutral that begs the question? It is so much easie to demonise Israel and bootlick the Arabs. Its so fashionable.
Good on you Bibbi.

(63)
lori h. Gordon,
December 19, 2011 5:08 AM

Absolutely agree. The NYTimes position has been disgusting and idiotic!

The NYTIMES position is irresponsibleand replete with misinformation. I'm glad I canceled my subscription some time ago when I realized the above...

(62)
Gerald A. Honigman,
December 19, 2011 3:53 AM

The blatant hypocrisy of the NYT and its editorial writers is an old story by now...the article of mine provided below sums it up nicely

Please open and read "Double Dhimmitude's Yes and No Man"...
http://www.virtualjerusalem.com/blogs.php?Itemid=2080

(61)
Ira Grossman,
December 19, 2011 3:01 AM

Boycott the New York Times

If you support Israel, boycott the New York Times and send an economic message to the old Gray Lady. There are many fine fair and balanced newspapers out there that would appreciate your financial support.

(60)
Anne Johnston,
December 19, 2011 2:17 AM

Good for Bibi and Israel

I was so glad to read that PM Netanyahou refused to contribute and article to the NY Times. They have become so biased and left leaning that I will no longer read, and believe anything they say.

(59)
James Stagg,
December 19, 2011 1:54 AM

Shame!

Shame on NYT for its vicious attacks on views which it does not deem to be "politically correct". Not only does this fish-wrapper attack Israel, but the Catholic Church and Tea Party as well.
NYT has turned out to be a sorry piece of newsprint, a shoddy Internet venture, and an ignorant and biased organization. As more people understand this, we can hope it will wither and die as the usleless rag it is.

(58)
Sue McCartney,
December 19, 2011 12:54 AM

Definitely agree with Bibi!!!

(57)
Marjorie Richman,
December 19, 2011 12:29 AM

With matlice toward none and charity for all,

What chutzpah the "New York Times" has to even ask the Prime Minister to devote his time,energy and talent to writing the Op-Ed piece. We applaud the Prime Minister for keeping the peace with the press and movintg on to the real goals of his administration which are to stay the course for peace with Israel's neighbors.

(56)
Anonymous,
December 18, 2011 11:39 PM

the new york times is definetly bias.the only way to take this trashy bias paper down is to boy cut it.unfortunitly lots of jews read this so called trash.

(55)
David S. Levine,
December 18, 2011 11:29 PM

YOU Reject It Too

It isn't enough that Bibi rejected the New York Times--YOU must reject it also. Tomorrow morning at 9:00 AM that rag, published by a family of self haters should be called and the blue plastic wrapper (which diminishes the environment) in which it's delivered should no longer appear in front of your home. When you call explain why you reject its presence in your home.
The fact of the matter is that The New York Times is no longer a newspaper but an opinion journal and its opinions are detrimental to the Jewish People. It should be expelled from our community family by family, subscriber by former subscriber.
If you think that you'll be diminished by not allowing your eyes to polluted by its sight, think again. There's a whole world out there--a world of print information and internet information that surpasses anything published in a building on which an Arab holds the mortgage, and most of it is not anti-Israel or anti-Jewish. Cancelling a subscription to that rag is equivalent to taking a shower after playing in the mud pit.
Do it and you'll feel cleaner for it.

(54)
Anonymous,
December 18, 2011 11:18 PM

This Israel bashing by the media is a direct doing of the obama administration and his handy works to put down what is the only thing that is right about the middle east "ISRAEL"

(53)
Marvin Cohen,
December 18, 2011 10:45 PM

I love Bibi!

Bibi is 100% correct to decline the NY Times! If Hitler were alive, he would be a NY Times subscriber!!

(52)
Linda Calderon,
December 18, 2011 10:39 PM

In full agreement with your PM

Yes, I have to agree with PM Netanyahu. Why would he want to send an op-ed to a paper that tends to distort facts and words? Give them the cold shoulder, Mr. Prime Minister. That is the thing to do and shows great wisdom. However, you may want to do an op-ed for the Washington Post and give more good PR to Israel as not enough is given. Why not more PR on how Israel helped in Haiti, Japan and other places? Not enough is published about her good works so let's do it!

(51)
Joseph Rapaport,
December 18, 2011 10:25 PM

The RIGHT decision

Bibi's refusal to add fuel to the NYT anti-semetic fire was
a correct one. Anything he submitted would be spun in a
negative way and not advance Israel's PR,

(50)
Donna,
December 18, 2011 9:10 PM

Best Decision

Prime Minister Netanyahu should never agree to contribute anything to this leftist paper. It is an embarassment to the US media in it's false reporting and biased leanings. It would certainly edit whatever was offered to benefit its own agenda.

(49)
Michael Strauss,
December 18, 2011 9:02 PM

Bibi is correct

I also reject the New York Times as an anti semetic reporting paper.

(48)
Anonymous,
December 18, 2011 8:48 PM

If you are going to publish opinion and not facts you should be more balanced in your selection process.

(47)
Metropolitan Ephraem,
December 18, 2011 8:43 PM

Hypocrisy is in vogue

Bibi is a gentleman who loves his country; but, The Times has an agenda irrespective of the TRUTH. "NEVER FORGET"

(46)
Shoshana Wege,
December 18, 2011 8:35 PM

I agree totally. Yay Prime Minister Netanyahu!

(45)
Dr. Pete Kleff,
December 18, 2011 8:31 PM

Hoo-yah!!!

Anonymous,
December 19, 2011 7:40 PM

Semper Fi Dr Kleff and on to November

(44)
cipora weiss,
December 18, 2011 8:26 PM

agree 100%

Kol hakavod too you, I unsubsribed from that "great paper" a long time ago.

(43)
Anonymous,
December 18, 2011 8:16 PM

I agree 100% with PM Netanyahu taking a stand against Israel bashing..

I agree 100% with PM Netanyahu for not responding to the NY Times and exposing them for their anti-Israel bias.

(42)
Ed Koenig,
December 18, 2011 8:13 PM

NY Times

Kol haKavod, Bibi.

(41)
Anonymous,
December 18, 2011 8:09 PM

thank you for trying to get the truth out there

never give up on trying to get the truth out there... hopefully in time people will see thru the Arab lies.

(40)
Laureen,
December 18, 2011 8:03 PM

The ship is sinking for the N.Y. Times

I believe we're seeing the self destruction of the New York Times Newspaper. They've been hurting more for subscribers and its no wonder why. When this newspaper fails to survive, and it will, the epitaph will read 'They were politically correct.' God told Abraham in Genesis 12:3..."I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse: and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you."

(39)
Anonymous,
December 18, 2011 7:48 PM

"RIGHT ON"

nO COMMENT NEEDED YOU SAID IT ALL AND TO THE POINT. WE AS JEWS AND THOSE THAT SUPPORT THE TRUTH MUST STAND UP FOR ALL OF THOSE THAT DIED DEFENDING THOSE PRINCIPALS. G-D ONLY KNOWA HOW MUCH THE MUSLIM AND ARAB COMMUNITIES HAVE BENEFITTED FROM OUR SACRAFICES AND HARD WORK.
THE AYATOLLAHA OBAMA AND HIS MUSLIM MARXIST MANIA ARE NO FREIND OF THE FREE AND DEMOCRATIC WORLD. THAT IS PUTTING MILDLY.
WHEN WE STAAND UP FOR ISRAEL, WE STAND UNITED WITH THE COCEPT OF FREEDOMS AND RIGHTS FOR ALL INCLUDING THE PALESTINIANS. IAM NOT SAYING THAT WE ARE ALL RIGHT AND THAT THEY ARE ALL WRONG. HOWEVER, THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER TELLS A MUCH DIFFERENT STORY THAN WHAT IS EXPREESED AND PUBLISHED IN THE LIBERAL BIASED MEDIA, WETHERR IN PRINT OR ONTV.
HOW CAN YOU HAVE FREEDOM OF SPEECH WHEN THE JEWS OR THOSE THAT LAWFULLY REPRESENT ISRAEL ARE NOT ALLOWED TO SPEAK THE TRUTH ON COLLEGE CAMPUS'S AND IN AND ON OTHER PUBLI VENUES. THE LEFT IS THE ONE BEING DISHONEST WITH THE TRUTH.
I ALSO MUST TELL YOU THAT TO MY GREAT REGRET I SUPPORTED AND VOTED FOR JIMMY CARTER AND BILL CLINTON.
WARMEST HOLIDAY WISHES, PEACE ON EARTH AND GOOD WELL TO ALL MEN/WOMEN. MERRY CHRISTMAS, HAPPY CHANUKAH, AND MAY WE ALL ENJOY A PEACE FILLED NEW YEAR. AMEN TO THAT BROTHER.
REGARDS,
AREI BEN MOSHE

(38)
Rachel,
December 18, 2011 7:04 PM

The Op-Ed page is not about reporting facts

I disagree with the PM's decision. NYT remains extremely influential, and the position of the Israeli government is not well understood by many Americans. I've often said the Israel might have great defense, but it needs to spend more money and thought on marketing. SO many Americans don't understand simple matters -- like the UN vote creating Israel, the several wars against Israel, the fact that Israel voluntarily pulled out of Gaza (and removed its own people to do so) only to have that region turned into missile bases, the fact that non-Jews and non-religious Jews can worship freely (or not at all), the recent conviction of a leading politician in accordance with the rule of law -- I could go on and on. The best cure for unpleasant, inaccurate freedom of speech is -- MORE SPEECH.

Anonymous,
December 19, 2011 9:08 AM

Misses the point

True, op-eds are not newspaper articles, but every writer has an ethical obligation to present history as it happened, whether in an op-ed or a news article. The opinion portion does NOT extend into how history took place. One cannot suddenly revise history in order to suit the needs of their narrative. Yet in publishing Abbas's op-ed and many other such examples that is exactly what the Times does on a continual basis. Not only is this practice ethically perverted, it is downright dangerous.

Anonymous,
December 19, 2011 9:21 AM

I wanted to add to my above comment that I fully agree with the rest of your post -- Israel does need to get its message out to the world. However, if this means giving credence to faux news outlets like the NYT, Israel should look to other venues to voice its message.

(37)
Anonymous,
December 18, 2011 7:01 PM

Shame on the NYT

Nyt has become a masive Tabloid publications with no credibility or integrity.

(36)
Mark Goldstein,
December 18, 2011 6:37 PM

The New York Times is not worth your attention

Soon - but never soon enough - the NYT will fade along with all the other dinosaurs of the mainstream US media.
It is possible they will survive as a Left-wing relic.
I used to read them for the book review, science news, and obituaries - but no more.
Now - there are places on the internet which are more convenient and certainly more truthful.
So - your answer to the NYT is fine - but too polite.
Mark Goldstein

(35)
Anonymous,
December 18, 2011 6:36 PM

agree with PM Netanyahu's decision

We agree with PM Netanyahu's decision

(34)
carolyn k. dinofsky,
December 18, 2011 6:31 PM

YES! YES! KEN! KEN!

IT'S ENOUGH ALREADY WITH THE WORLD,THE UNITED NOTHING, AND THE PRESS DEMONIZING ISRAEL. WE'RE DAMNED IF WE DO AND WE'RE DAMNED IF WE DO NOT! SO, WHY NOT STAND UP AS BIBI DID. KOL HAKAVOD BIBI!

(33)
David Ostriker,
December 18, 2011 6:23 PM

Curious

Will the Times Publish This letter?
I think not, but they may be forced to if you succeed in making it known globally.
Good Work
RDMO

(32)
Fran,
December 18, 2011 6:22 PM

Re.: N.Y. Times

I cancelled my subscription to the N.Y. Times because I objected to the Israel bashing and lies which were printed. The original Jewish owners of the paper are turning over in their graves.

(31)
Anonymous,
December 18, 2011 6:15 PM

Yes. I agree with Prime Minister Netanyahu's rrefusal to have an article of his published by NYT. Especially given NYT"s automatic anti-Israel bias - in itself an enigmatic intellectual and moral ievel

(30)
T. Santos,
December 18, 2011 6:10 PM

Right On Bibi Right On!!

G-D bless Bibi!! A Righteous & Honorable Man with the Guts to say what he means and stick to it.
I would rather read/listen/watch anythinng he says/thinks/does than anything the NYtimes or our President has/does a 100's times over.
Shame on the NYtimes for willfully publishing LIES!
It will deserve to be on/under the ash heap of history soon!

(29)
Anonymous,
December 18, 2011 5:52 PM

Agree that the Prime Minister acted correctly

he decision not to write an op ed piece for the NY Times was the correct one. That paper is so biased against Israel, that it would somehow try to distort what the Prime Minister wrote.

(28)
Judy,
December 18, 2011 5:43 PM

Ignore and isolate bullies and name-callers

I was taught many years ago that the best way to handle the school-yard bully who teases, taunts and seeks to put down others is to ignore and isolate unless attacked physically. The New York Times denigrates those do not agree with its far left ideas, so, of course, Bibi did the right thing by refusing to offer an op-ed piece. What the rest of us need to do is to ignore this bully, educate our friends and family about its cheap tactics and positions, don't buy the paper, don't read it, be sure your kids understand its severe biases (particularly those who are in college - their professors may tell them otherwise). And, by the way, many local newspapers have the same bias. I chose to cancel my subscription to the local city paper in favor of the Wall Street Journal, which is much fairer to Israel and espouses sensible, intelligent approaches to most national and international issues. We are the consumers and together we determine which businesses prosper or fail. It is time for all of us to take the actions that force the New York Times to close its doors -- it's already halfway there anyway.

(27)
Stuart Weiss,
December 18, 2011 5:25 PM

Thanks your article describing Bibi's rejection NYTimes Op-Ed!

Pleased and informed in reading your column re; Benjamin Netenyahu's rejection of abysmal New York Times in providing them an op-ed column. The expression "time wounds all heels"
definitely at work here

(26)
Judy Moran,
December 18, 2011 5:14 PM

The right decision

I agree wholeheartedly with Netanyahu's decision not to legitimize the editorial pages of The New York Times by submitting a piece for publication. While at first glance it might seem that any chance to connect with people ought to be seized, there comes a time when principles should be the most important criteria used to decide upon an action. Clearly that time is at hand, and helping the Times to pretend that they are "fair and balanced" in any way, shape or form accomplishes more harm than whatever good might have been achieved by the attempt to reach people through their pages. It is a sad state of affairs when the press -- which was given wide freedom precisely because it is supposed to be a source of truth for a free society -- becomes instead a trumpet for whichever side of the argument they happen to agree with. At a very early age I attended a rally where President Nixon spoke, and when I watched the report on the TV later that evening, the use of his own words, carefully edited, made it seem as though he was saying the exact opposite of what I heard. I am not championing him -- I am simply saying that the truth was not part of the agenda on the news that night. A sad lesson to learn, but one that everyone should understand: you can't necessarily trust what you read or even hear with your own ears. People can twist the truth to fit their agenda, and apparently the "truth" in fashion today is that Israel is the problem, not part of the solution.

(25)
Terry,
December 18, 2011 5:11 PM

comment

Yes, I support BiBi's decision to not contribute op-ed articles to the New York Times

(24)
Gloria,
December 18, 2011 5:03 PM

Courageous

I applaud the Prime Minister for his courageous decision to ignore the NY Times' request. Too many politicians in the world today submit to the notion that there is prestige in having their names appear as contributors to the Times. The paper has descended into being a mouthpiece for 1930s-type communists. The Times is out of touch with modern-day Americans.

(23)
Len Rome,
December 18, 2011 4:52 PM

BIBI refusal to NYT based on its consistent anti Israel bias

NYT has morphed to a virulent, unchanging anti-Israel
stance. The support of US Jews to Israel is powerful but NYT propaganda goes past them, lost in the blur
of media saturation. Effective media exposure of NYT
editorial bias and pro-muslim slant will negatively affect this.

(22)
Philippe,
December 18, 2011 4:49 PM

How sad to see that once great paper debase itself.

Good on Bibi for taking such a decision, and boo to the N.Y. Times for harbouring such prejudice in its columns. This paper's culture sits well with a dictator-run country and if it continues along this line perhaps it should move its headquarters to the many dictatorships in the middle East!

(21)
Zahav Melech,
December 18, 2011 4:29 PM

the new york times op-ed board has been maliciously smeared by a liar

Leave it to Bibi to frame a totally warped narrative, especially that Tom Friedman quote taken out of context from an op-ed on how concerned about and alienated from Israel's increasingly ethnically exclusive direction. The ethnocrats have hoodwinked you.

(20)
Ilene Richman,
December 18, 2011 4:29 PM

THE NY TIMES IS A RAG PAPER

The NY Times is a very liberal paper and is always opposed to whatever Israel proposes or does.It is not worth the money of the printed paper.It should close its doors.It libels Israel all the time.Thomas Friedman, a journalist for NY Times, a JINO, always writes derogatory opinions about Israel.But always has a good word for Palestinians, India and sometimes China. He is biased and is not a true journalist.I would not read the NY Times if it was sent to me free.It praise Barack Obama, one of the worst presidents of all time.I say to heck with the NY Times. They are a propagandist machine for the liberals and anti-Israel. Goodby NY Times.

(19)
Clifton Rothman,
December 18, 2011 4:28 PM

Of course Bibi is right.

The facts are clearly stated by Ron Dermer.

(18)
moshe jacobs,
December 18, 2011 4:24 PM

totally agree.boycott the times as i do

(17)
Chaya Passow,
December 18, 2011 4:23 PM

Good for You, Bibi!

How refreshing to have our Prime Minister stand up to the now-infamous New York Times. Having been raised with the view that the Times was an intelligent, balanced and fair newspaper, it took a bit of evidence to prove otherwise. I still have rather liberal relatives who continue to believe that the NYTimes was given to Moses on Sinai!
There is an interesting Torah commentary who suggests that the reason that the pig is the quintessential "non-kosher" animal is because it has the outward sign of being kosher, the split hoof, but not the inner one, the chewing of the cud. It's as if the pig sticks out its hoof to show, "Look at me. I'm kosher!". God bless Bibi for being unwilling to play the part of the "pig's foot" for the New York Times.

(16)
Nate Feinberg,
December 18, 2011 4:18 PM

Fit to print!

My only comment regarding the NY Times is that this paper is truly not fit to be printed. Anyone subscribing to this paper, especially Jews, should know better. But alas, blind allegance to their liberal cause will be everyone's undoing.

(15)
Isidoro,
December 18, 2011 4:12 PM

Well done Bibi

It is imposible to frny that NYT is a very important newspaper in the world, Those of us who have a liberal view point agree with them most of the time. As far as Israel and Judaism it seems that the jewish writers of the paper have embraced the position of the left leaning Israeli academics, and bash Judaism, Israel and its goverment, which is wrong.
Israel politics is a hot issue in the world and there is a deep antisemitic feeling out there, and quite regretfully it also permeats even iews who want to sound politiclly correct in the world. We have know for centuries that being Jewish is difficult, it still is, We are not perfect but have to pray to God that Jewish people and their leders show what has made Jews last and out grow their anemies: "A IDISHE KOP".

(14)
Arie,
December 18, 2011 4:10 PM

Fully agree.

FULLY agree !

(13)
Jacob Zabicky,
December 18, 2011 4:08 PM

You will not see me on the first row applauding Netanyahu's managing of Israel's internal and international affairs.
Nevertheless, his reasons for declining to op-ed in your prestigious paper hold water. An evenhanded approach to the Israel-Palestine problem is not demonstrated by "we gave Abu-Masen one, we give Bibi one", their stands are predictable, and it's only the ability of their shadow writers that will be measured against each other.
The litmus test for NYTimes is the free flow of opinion for and against the policies and action of both sides, and the contribution of the writers toward the solution instead of the exacerbation of the problems.
To this point we have managed not to badly in the role of punching bag, and we have learned some evasive and counterattacking tactics to avoid becoming a piñata. The big strategy to achieve the dreamed peace in this land is still a mystery for us and for the great leaders of the world (the list of those who attempted is not short), so let's take it little step by little step.

(12)
S.Danieli,
December 18, 2011 4:03 PM

propotion

Just keep the news about Israel in the right proportion to its size. there are enough news to write by J.Friedman about Venezuela, Kongo, Tibet , Norway and so on.
or maybe, just one article about Weizmann institute or the Israel & the Nobel prize record.
i just afraid that J.F will come to an conclusion that there is an high level conspiracy in the academic world to give Israel to many prices versus its proportion in the world, who knows..

(11)
Leo Borak,
December 18, 2011 3:48 PM

A very liberal paper damaging to the USA as well.

I stand with Israel, it's a far left paper that I'm looking to see go under, just can't see anyone buying this trash, You did the smart thing in declining.

(10)
Anonymous,
December 18, 2011 3:35 PM

new york times fishing for Bibi

As a foreign observer it is obvious to me the N Y Times deserves this lambasting It clearly has does not subscribe to any ethical standards It is a purveyor of bias and falsehood How shameful !

(9)
b,
December 18, 2011 3:24 PM

As a once-proud journalist, I am ashamed at the debasement of newspapers as a once-proud source of fact , truth and understanding. How sad!

(8)
C. Goldapper,
December 18, 2011 3:12 PM

The Times has lost its credability as a journalistic enterprise. It is merely reinterating the new wave of intellectual anti-Semitic jargon.

(7)
Itzy,
December 18, 2011 3:07 PM

It"s about time Bibi stuck it to those self-hating Jews.

The N.Y. Times made me sick. Reading it was like listening to Ms Goodman on NPR; I gave them three strikes and they were out. My parents survived pogroms and my wife's Hitler. I don't need to read such consistently biased and prejudiced diatribes againt the only Democratic ally the U.S. has in the mid-east by mostly self-hating Jews. Now let's see if your editorial board has as much guts as Bibi.

(6)
Joseph,
December 18, 2011 3:03 PM

Amen

This foolish paper will escort the end of the west. Publishing anti US articles...Valerie Plum's desk job turns into CIA leak case....and nowhere is there a peep about prayer of some religions congesting Manhatten. Bibi said once...."I'd rather have negative press than a glowing obituary"

(5)
Elia,
December 18, 2011 2:45 PM

NYT op-ed by Netanyahu

The NYT is not worth the paper it is written on because they have allowed themselves to be infiltrated and hijacked by people from the religion of hate and their naive followers. I agree with Netanyahu's refusal to have his op-ed in the New York Times. They are not worthy of it.

(4)
Henry,
December 18, 2011 2:38 PM

A Matter of Honor

On the High Holy Days we pray to G-d with the word "v'ten kavod le amecha" (i.e. restore honor to your nation). Thank you Bibi. Those who dishonor us should not be coddled!

(3)
Yonaton,
December 18, 2011 2:06 PM

Bibi rejects New York Times

The New York Times is a extremely biased paper that used to have a balanced editorial policy but now is a politically correct paper ( meaning left) and no longer has even a modicum of balance. Bibi was right in rejecting it

(2)
Abigail,
December 18, 2011 1:32 PM

A devastating and brilliant critique

The editors of the NYT should be made to understand their paper is not worthy of the respect and dignity due a paper of true journalistic standards and ethics. When you have a Jewish editorialist like Tom Friedman invoking a common anti-Semitic meme as "bought and paid for by the Israel lobby" , you realize you are dealing with a paper that long ago crossed the line of moral decency. And for those who would argue an op-ed by Bibi may have a positive affect on the NYT's readership, I would offer that devoted readers of NYT opinion pieces are prone to the same lapses in reasoned thinking and intellectual honesty that pervade the editorial board of the NYT.

(1)
Andrew,
December 18, 2011 12:02 PM

Yes.

I stopped reading the NY Times a long time ago for
reasons similarly stated by our esteemed leader.
We all have better things to do with our time then give
credibility to this supposed journalistic enterprise.

I was born with a neuromuscular disease known as Spinal Muscular Atrophy and have been confined to a wheelchair my entire life. Unfortunately my sister and I were raised without any religious instruction or guidance. My father wasn't Jewish and although my mother is, she openly claims to be an atheist. The "good news" is that both my sister and myself - independent of each other and at different times in our lives - realized that we are Jewish and chose to live a Jewish life.

Because of my disability, I'm not always able to attend services on Shabbat, but I always light candles, pray from a Siddur and read the weekly Torah portion. I would like to know whether, considering my situation, if using a computer is allowed during the Sabbath? I found the complete Bible online and since my computer is voice-activated I don't have to struggle to turn pages or continuously ask for assistance.

Thank you to everyone at Aish.com for making it possible for myself and so many others to learn about being Jewish and grow in the most important part of our lives.

The Aish Rabbi Replies:

Thank you so much for your encouraging words and for sharing your inspiring story.

God gives each of us a set of challenges. To those more capable of conquering difficulties, He gave bigger challenges. A challenge from God is a sign that He cares about us and has confidence in our ability to become great.

It sounds like you're doing great!

As for using the computer on Shabbat, that is prohibited. A foundation of Judaism is that we need to respect God's wishes, even if we think that doing otherwise is "for a good reason." Consider this story:

A king calls in his trusted minister and says: "I have an important mission for you to perform. Go to the neighboring kingdom and meet in the palace with their leaders. But remember one thing - under no circumstances must you remove your shirt during this meeting. Now go and do as I say."

The minister sets off on his merry way and soon arrives at the neighboring kingdom. There he heads straight for the palace where he meets with the King. In the midst of their discussion, he sees some of the king's officers pointing and laughing at him.

"Why are you laughing?" asks the visiting minister.

"Because we've never seen someone with such a pronounced hunchback as yourself," they say.

"What are you talking about? I'm not a hunchback!"

"Of course you are!"

"No I'm not!"

"We'll bet you one million dollars that you are!"

"Fine - I'll gladly take your bet."

"Okay, so take off your shirt and prove it."

At which point the minister remembers the parting words of the king... "under no circumstances must you remove your shirt during the meeting." Yet, the minister reasons, a million dollars would certainly bring added wealth to the king's coffers. I know I'm not a hunchback, so I'll surely win the bet. Of course, under these circumstances the king would approve...

The minister removes his shirt and proudly displays his perfect posture. With pride in his achievement, he holds out his hand, into which is placed a check for one million dollars.

The minister can barely contain his excitement. He quickly ends the meeting and runs back to give the wonderful news to his king. "I earned you a million dollars!" exclaims the minister. "It was easy. I only had to remove my shirt to prove that I wasn't a hunchback."

"You did what?!" shouts the king. "But I told you specifically not to remove your shirt. I trusted that you'd follow instructions, and so I bet the other king $10 million dollars that he couldn't get you to remove your shirt!"

The Torah tells us "Do not add or subtract from the mitzvahs." (Deut. 4:2) Jewish law is a precise metaphysical science. Consider a great work of art. Would you consider adding a few notes to a Bach fugue, or some brushstrokes to a Rembrandt portrait?!

Perfection, by definition, cannot be improved upon. Altering Torah law is an unacceptable implication that God is lacking.

The verse in Psalms 19:8 declares: "Torat Hashem Temimah" - the Torah of God is complete. For just as adding one wire to a transistor radio means it no longer can pick up reception, so too we mustn't tinker with Jewish law. The mitzvahs of God are perfect.

May the Almighty give you strength to continue your growth in Judaism.

In 1315, King Louis X of France called back the Jews who had been expelled a few decades earlier by King Louis IX. This marked a theme in Jewish-French life: expulsions and subsequent invitations to return. The French monarchy was trying to establish their land as the "new Jerusalem," and to fulfill this mission attempted several crusades to Israel. In 1615, King Louis XIII ordered that Christians were forbidden to speak with Jews, upon penalty of death. Eventually, in 1683, King Louis XIV expelled the Jews from the colony of Martinique.

Focus on what you do want. Make your goal explicit. “My goal is to increase my moments of joy.” This way, every single moment of joy is a successful moment.

Celebrate each moment of joy. Be grateful every time you experience joy.

Having this goal will place your attention on joy. Instead of feeling bad when you are not joyful, you will experience positive feelings about experiencing more joy.

Each moment of joy in your entire life is experienced one moment at a time. You can’t have more than one moment of joy in any given moment, but you can increase the number of joyful moments. How? By focusing on it.

There is no person on earth so righteous, who does only good and does not sin (Ecclesiastes 7:20).

Reading the suggestions for ridding oneself of character defects, someone might say, "These are all very helpful for someone who has character defects, but I do not see anything about myself that is defective."

In the above-cited verse, Solomon states what we should all know: no one is perfect. People who cannot easily find imperfections within themselves must have a perception so grossly distorted that they may not even be aware of major defects. By analogy, if a person cannot hear anything, it is not that the whole world has become absolutely silent, but that he or she has lost all sense of hearing and may thus not be able to hear even the loudest thunder.

In his monumental work, Duties of the Heart, Rabbeinu Bachaye quotes a wise man who told his disciples, "If you do not find defects within yourself, I am afraid you have the greatest defect of all: vanity." In other words, people who see everything from an "I am great/right" perspective will of course believe that they do no wrong.

When people can see no faults in themselves, it is generally because they feel so inadequate that the awareness of any personal defects would be devastating. Ironically, vanity is a defense against low self-esteem. If we accept ourselves as fallible human beings and also have a sense of self-worth, we can become even better than we are.

Today I shall...

be aware that if I do not find things within myself to correct, it may be because I am threatened by such discoveries.

With stories and insights,
Rabbi Twerski's new book Twerski on Machzor makes Rosh Hashanah prayers more meaningful. Click here to order...